Cargando…

Reliability of pulse pressure and stroke volume variation in assessing fluid responsiveness in the operating room: a metanalysis and a metaregression

BACKGROUND: Pulse pressure and stroke volume variation (PPV and SVV) have been widely used in surgical patients as predictors of fluid challenge (FC) response. Several factors may affect the reliability of these indices in predicting fluid responsiveness, such as the position of the patient, the use...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Messina, Antonio, Caporale, Mariagiovanna, Calabrò, Lorenzo, Lionetti, Giulia, Bono, Daniele, Matronola, Guia Margherita, Brunati, Andrea, Frassanito, Luciano, Morenghi, Emanuela, Antonelli, Massimo, Chew, Michelle S., Cecconi, Maurizio
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10631038/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37940953
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13054-023-04706-0
_version_ 1785132283356774400
author Messina, Antonio
Caporale, Mariagiovanna
Calabrò, Lorenzo
Lionetti, Giulia
Bono, Daniele
Matronola, Guia Margherita
Brunati, Andrea
Frassanito, Luciano
Morenghi, Emanuela
Antonelli, Massimo
Chew, Michelle S.
Cecconi, Maurizio
author_facet Messina, Antonio
Caporale, Mariagiovanna
Calabrò, Lorenzo
Lionetti, Giulia
Bono, Daniele
Matronola, Guia Margherita
Brunati, Andrea
Frassanito, Luciano
Morenghi, Emanuela
Antonelli, Massimo
Chew, Michelle S.
Cecconi, Maurizio
author_sort Messina, Antonio
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Pulse pressure and stroke volume variation (PPV and SVV) have been widely used in surgical patients as predictors of fluid challenge (FC) response. Several factors may affect the reliability of these indices in predicting fluid responsiveness, such as the position of the patient, the use of laparoscopy and the opening of the abdomen or the chest, combined FC characteristics, the tidal volume (Vt) and the type of anesthesia. METHODS: Systematic review and metanalysis of PPV and SVV use in surgical adult patients. The QUADAS-2 scale was used to assess the risk of bias of included studies. We adopted a metanalysis pooling of aggregate data from 5 subgroups of studies with random effects models using the common-effect inverse variance model. The area under the curve (AUC) of pooled receiving operating characteristics (ROC) curves was reported. A metaregression was performed using FC type, volume, and rate as independent variables. RESULTS: We selected 59 studies enrolling 2,947 patients, with a median of fluid responders of 55% (46–63). The pooled AUC for the PPV was 0.77 (0.73–0.80), with a mean threshold of 10.8 (10.6–11.0). The pooled AUC for the SVV was 0.76 (0.72–0.80), with a mean threshold of 12.1 (11.6–12.7); 19 studies (32.2%) reported the grey zone of PPV or SVV, with a median of 56% (40–62) and 57% (46–83) of patients included, respectively. In the different subgroups, the AUC and the best thresholds ranged from 0.69 and 0.81 and from 6.9 to 11.5% for the PPV, and from 0.73 to 0.79 and 9.9 to 10.8% for the SVV. A high Vt and the choice of colloids positively impacted on PPV performance, especially among patients with closed chest and abdomen, or in prone position. CONCLUSION: The overall performance of PPV and SVV in operating room in predicting fluid responsiveness is moderate, ranging close to an AUC of 0.80 only some subgroups of surgical patients. The grey zone of these dynamic indices is wide and should be carefully considered during the assessment of fluid responsiveness. A high Vt and the choice of colloids for the FC are factors potentially influencing PPV reliability. Trial Registration: PROSPERO (CRD42022379120), December 2022. https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=379120 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13054-023-04706-0.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10631038
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-106310382023-11-07 Reliability of pulse pressure and stroke volume variation in assessing fluid responsiveness in the operating room: a metanalysis and a metaregression Messina, Antonio Caporale, Mariagiovanna Calabrò, Lorenzo Lionetti, Giulia Bono, Daniele Matronola, Guia Margherita Brunati, Andrea Frassanito, Luciano Morenghi, Emanuela Antonelli, Massimo Chew, Michelle S. Cecconi, Maurizio Crit Care Research BACKGROUND: Pulse pressure and stroke volume variation (PPV and SVV) have been widely used in surgical patients as predictors of fluid challenge (FC) response. Several factors may affect the reliability of these indices in predicting fluid responsiveness, such as the position of the patient, the use of laparoscopy and the opening of the abdomen or the chest, combined FC characteristics, the tidal volume (Vt) and the type of anesthesia. METHODS: Systematic review and metanalysis of PPV and SVV use in surgical adult patients. The QUADAS-2 scale was used to assess the risk of bias of included studies. We adopted a metanalysis pooling of aggregate data from 5 subgroups of studies with random effects models using the common-effect inverse variance model. The area under the curve (AUC) of pooled receiving operating characteristics (ROC) curves was reported. A metaregression was performed using FC type, volume, and rate as independent variables. RESULTS: We selected 59 studies enrolling 2,947 patients, with a median of fluid responders of 55% (46–63). The pooled AUC for the PPV was 0.77 (0.73–0.80), with a mean threshold of 10.8 (10.6–11.0). The pooled AUC for the SVV was 0.76 (0.72–0.80), with a mean threshold of 12.1 (11.6–12.7); 19 studies (32.2%) reported the grey zone of PPV or SVV, with a median of 56% (40–62) and 57% (46–83) of patients included, respectively. In the different subgroups, the AUC and the best thresholds ranged from 0.69 and 0.81 and from 6.9 to 11.5% for the PPV, and from 0.73 to 0.79 and 9.9 to 10.8% for the SVV. A high Vt and the choice of colloids positively impacted on PPV performance, especially among patients with closed chest and abdomen, or in prone position. CONCLUSION: The overall performance of PPV and SVV in operating room in predicting fluid responsiveness is moderate, ranging close to an AUC of 0.80 only some subgroups of surgical patients. The grey zone of these dynamic indices is wide and should be carefully considered during the assessment of fluid responsiveness. A high Vt and the choice of colloids for the FC are factors potentially influencing PPV reliability. Trial Registration: PROSPERO (CRD42022379120), December 2022. https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=379120 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13054-023-04706-0. BioMed Central 2023-11-08 /pmc/articles/PMC10631038/ /pubmed/37940953 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13054-023-04706-0 Text en © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research
Messina, Antonio
Caporale, Mariagiovanna
Calabrò, Lorenzo
Lionetti, Giulia
Bono, Daniele
Matronola, Guia Margherita
Brunati, Andrea
Frassanito, Luciano
Morenghi, Emanuela
Antonelli, Massimo
Chew, Michelle S.
Cecconi, Maurizio
Reliability of pulse pressure and stroke volume variation in assessing fluid responsiveness in the operating room: a metanalysis and a metaregression
title Reliability of pulse pressure and stroke volume variation in assessing fluid responsiveness in the operating room: a metanalysis and a metaregression
title_full Reliability of pulse pressure and stroke volume variation in assessing fluid responsiveness in the operating room: a metanalysis and a metaregression
title_fullStr Reliability of pulse pressure and stroke volume variation in assessing fluid responsiveness in the operating room: a metanalysis and a metaregression
title_full_unstemmed Reliability of pulse pressure and stroke volume variation in assessing fluid responsiveness in the operating room: a metanalysis and a metaregression
title_short Reliability of pulse pressure and stroke volume variation in assessing fluid responsiveness in the operating room: a metanalysis and a metaregression
title_sort reliability of pulse pressure and stroke volume variation in assessing fluid responsiveness in the operating room: a metanalysis and a metaregression
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10631038/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37940953
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13054-023-04706-0
work_keys_str_mv AT messinaantonio reliabilityofpulsepressureandstrokevolumevariationinassessingfluidresponsivenessintheoperatingroomametanalysisandametaregression
AT caporalemariagiovanna reliabilityofpulsepressureandstrokevolumevariationinassessingfluidresponsivenessintheoperatingroomametanalysisandametaregression
AT calabrolorenzo reliabilityofpulsepressureandstrokevolumevariationinassessingfluidresponsivenessintheoperatingroomametanalysisandametaregression
AT lionettigiulia reliabilityofpulsepressureandstrokevolumevariationinassessingfluidresponsivenessintheoperatingroomametanalysisandametaregression
AT bonodaniele reliabilityofpulsepressureandstrokevolumevariationinassessingfluidresponsivenessintheoperatingroomametanalysisandametaregression
AT matronolaguiamargherita reliabilityofpulsepressureandstrokevolumevariationinassessingfluidresponsivenessintheoperatingroomametanalysisandametaregression
AT brunatiandrea reliabilityofpulsepressureandstrokevolumevariationinassessingfluidresponsivenessintheoperatingroomametanalysisandametaregression
AT frassanitoluciano reliabilityofpulsepressureandstrokevolumevariationinassessingfluidresponsivenessintheoperatingroomametanalysisandametaregression
AT morenghiemanuela reliabilityofpulsepressureandstrokevolumevariationinassessingfluidresponsivenessintheoperatingroomametanalysisandametaregression
AT antonellimassimo reliabilityofpulsepressureandstrokevolumevariationinassessingfluidresponsivenessintheoperatingroomametanalysisandametaregression
AT chewmichelles reliabilityofpulsepressureandstrokevolumevariationinassessingfluidresponsivenessintheoperatingroomametanalysisandametaregression
AT cecconimaurizio reliabilityofpulsepressureandstrokevolumevariationinassessingfluidresponsivenessintheoperatingroomametanalysisandametaregression